Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33001339›Full record

ArticleIndian journal of gastroenterology : official journal of the Indian Society of Gastroenterology2020

Self-expanding metal stent in esophageal perforations and anastomotic leaks.

Anoop John, Sudipta Dhar Chowdhury, Reuben Thomas Kurien, Deepu David, Amit Kumar Dutta, Ebby George Simon, Vijay Abraham, A J Joseph, Inian Samarasam

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Indian journal of gastroenterology : official journal of the Indian Society of Gastroenterology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 18% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Observational
  4. Article
  5. Indian Journal of Gastroenterology September-October 2020.Indian journal of gastroenterology : official journal of the Indian Society of Gastroenterology · 2020
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Anoop JohnDepartment of Gastroenterology, Christian Medical College, Vellore 632 004, India.
Sudipta Dhar ChowdhuryDepartment of Gastroenterology, Christian Medical College, Vellore 632 004, India. sudiptadharchowdhury@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6484-0218
Reuben Thomas KurienDepartment of Gastroenterology, Christian Medical College, Vellore 632 004, India.
Deepu DavidDepartment of Gastroenterology, Christian Medical College, Vellore 632 004, India.
Amit Kumar DuttaDepartment of Gastroenterology, Christian Medical College, Vellore 632 004, India.
Ebby George SimonDepartment of Gastroenterology, Christian Medical College, Vellore 632 004, India.
Vijay AbrahamUpper GI Surgery Unit, Division of Surgery, Christian Medical College, Vellore 632 004, India.
A J JosephDepartment of Gastroenterology, Christian Medical College, Vellore 632 004, India.
Inian SamarasamUpper GI Surgery Unit, Division of Surgery, Christian Medical College, Vellore 632 004, India.
Christian Medical College, Vellore · IN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND

aimsPlacement of self-expanding metal stents (SEMS) has emerged as a minimally invasive treatment option for esophageal perforation and leaks. The aim of our study was to assess the role of SEMS for the management of benign esophageal diseases such as perforations and anastomotic leaks.

methodsAll patients (n = 26) who underwent SEMS placement for esophageal perforation and anastomotic leaks between May 2012 and February 2019 were included. Data were analyzed in relation to the indications, type of stent used, complications, and outcomes.

resultsIndications for stent placement included anastomotic leaks 65% (n = 17) and perforations 35% (n = 9). Fully covered SEMS (FCSEMS) was placed in 25 patients, and in 1, partially covered SEMS (PCSEMS) was placed. Stent placement was successful in all the patients (n = 26). Four patients did not report for follow-up after stenting. Among the patients on follow-up, 91% (20/22) had healing of the mucosal defect. Stent-related complications were seen in 5 (23%) patients and included stent migration [3], reactive hyperplasia [1] and stricture [1].

conclusionCovered stent placement for a duration of 8 weeks is technically safe and clinically effective as a first-line procedure for bridging and healing benign esophageal perforation and leaks.

Indexed as

Self Expandable Metallic StentsAnastomotic LeakEsophageal PerforationFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansMaleMinimally Invasive Surgical ProceduresTime FactorsTreatment OutcomeAchalasia cardiaBenign strictureEsophageal foreign bodyEsophageal leaksEsophageal perforationEsophagectomyIatrogenicMediastinitisTherapeutic endoscopy

Identifiers

PMID33001339
OpenAlexW3089675472

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.